This memo is to outline to you of the potential health risk Irvine’s drinking and tap water poses to its citizens. This piece will first provide you the details of our water quality, of which you may or may not be fully aware of, and then give you my opinion of how to proceed.

Nearly 65% of Irvine’s water supply is groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin. Other groundwater sources include the Colorado River and the Harding Canyon Dam. These groundwater sources must be protected from contamination as it supplies more than two million residents across several cities. Groundwater can also contain naturally present germs and potentially dangerous elements from the environment, including radon and arsenic. However, groundwater is more often contaminated by human activity, often from incorrect use of pesticides to chemical spills. 

Such problems are present in the Orange County North Basin plume, a critical water source and part of the OC Groundwater Basin. It is located under Anaheim and Fullerton and takes up 6.5 square miles. Contamination was detected several years ago, with particles such as trichloroethene (TCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE), and 1,4-dioxane. Potentially responsible parties include manufacturing industries that operated from 1950-1970. Evidence finds that companies active during that time spilled industrial pollutants into the North Basin. These pollutants mostly consisted of volatile organic compounds (VOC’s), which migrated from the soil into the groundwater basin. In 2020, the site was listed by the EPA as a National Priorities List.

As more than half of Irvine’s water supply comes from the Orange County Groundwater Basin and other sub-basins, it is most likely that our own water supply has been contaminated. A 2021 report by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) for the Irvine Ranch Water District proves that such is the case. The evidence compiled in the report is from the Compliance History database, US EPA Enforcement, and tests conducted by the California State Water Resources Board.
42 contaminants were detected, with over a third exceeding health guidelines. Such contaminants include 1,4-Dioxane, arsenic, chloroform, chromium (hexavalent), uranium, nitrate, and bromoform, to name a few. The majority of these pollutants have been proven to increase the likelihood of cancer. Mind you, the amount of particles for each contaminant does not exceed federal regulation. However, this action level should be seen not as the acceptable limit, but as a mere indicator that there is indeed particle contamination in our drinking water system. As the AAP and CDC confirms, there is no safe level for contaminants in drinking water. The health standard is, and should be, zero parts per billion.

I will go on to emphasize the dangers of maintaining our current water quality level by listing the contaminants in this utility and explain their various hazards. 1,4-Dioxane is a volatile organic compound and as aforementioned, most likely came from plastic manufacturing runoff and industrial waste discharges. 1,4-Dioxane does not break down easily, so once it enters a drinking water supply, it stays there. It has also been classified under California Proposition 65 that dioxane is a carcinogen. It causes liver and kidney toxicity and increases the risk of cancer. There is no legal limit for 1,4 Dioxane and the amount found exceeded the EWG health guideline, and the national and state averages. 

Arsenic is a common contaminant of drinking water and is a known carcinogen. The naturally occurring mineral causes bladder, lung, kidney, prostate, and skin cancer. Our groundwater carried 1.19 parts per billion of arsenic. However, the legal limit was set as 10 ppb by the Environmental Protection Agency in 2001. This should not provide any solace. The EPA’s analysis in 2010 reported that arsenic is much more toxic than previously estimated. Their analysis also found that the limit was not low enough to protect public health, causing up to six hundred cancer cases in a million people who drink arsenic-contaminated water over a long period of time. Again, there is no safe amount of a contaminant in a water supply except zero. The limit has not changed in more than twenty years, even as evidence points towards the fact that it is yet too high. California’s public health goal, as defined by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), is a maximum of 0.004 ppb, a far way from the amount we carry now. However, the consequences stretch farther than just unsafe drinking. Contaminated water used for irrigation and food preparation poses one of the greatest threats to public health. Arsenic can also be exposed to humans through food and can cause chronic conditions later on. 

Chromium (Hexavalent) is another carcinogen that is a common polluter of drinking water. However, without a legal limit, chromium six is not as moderated as it should be given how often it contaminates American drinking water. OEHHA has labeled 0.02 ppb for chromium six as a public health goal, the level at which the contaminant does not pose at least a significant health risk. Our utility exceeds the goal yet again, carrying 0.175 parts per billion of chromium six. The health effects of the toxic metal includes but is not limited to kidney and liver damage, occupational asthma, perforated eardrums, respiratory cancer, erosion of teeth, and edema. The risk of developing cancer increases with the amount of exposure and the length of time.
These are only three examples out of the forty-two contaminants found in the Irvine water supply. It is clear that the tap water that the Irvine residents drink is in fact unsafe. If such a pattern continues, the risk of cancer and other illnesses increases. This regards the safety of our citizens. Thus, I will provide you with two ways of which I think Irvine should act. The first concerns supplying filtration units through a budget to residents unable to afford them. As provided by the US Census Bureau, in 2021 an estimated 35 thousand people live in poverty, 12.3 percent of the population in Irvine. Consequently, thousands of people are unable to have luxuries such as the filters, not knowing the invisible dangers in what they believe is safe water. Filtering the water that they drink at home would be able to provide a safer supply of water for the household. 

The alternative would be to clean up the pollution in the Orange County Groundwater Basin, as it remains the largest source of Irvine’s water supply and a hazard. This would first mean cutting off the contamination from reaching other parts of the basin as it did in the North Basin. As the North Basin was listed by the EPA as a National Priorities List, Orange County has both state and national resources at their disposal. Parties that were responsible, such as the industries operating around the basin in the twentieth-century, could be compelled to pay their share of the cleanup. As for methods to treat the basin, Pump and treat is a possible means to clean up contaminated groundwater, extracting the water and conveying it to a treatment system that removes the pollutants above-ground. This also helps contain contaminant plumes from spreading. Permeable reactive barriers, chemical reduction, chemical oxidation, and biodegradation are also feasible alternatives.

In closing, it is all too clear that the water quality in Irvine is not yet safe for the residents. Although there will always be a risk that the contaminants remain in miniscule amounts, the risk must be made as insignificant as possible. The wellbeing of the millions of citizens residing in this city depends upon a safe connection with the most vital element. Although we may weaken our economy by increasing our filtration efforts, the scale is still being weighed between lives and money. If we do not act, we lower the barriers that protect our welfare and safety, as our city gradually succumbs to the chronic, invisible exposure that degrades our body, weakens the bones, and dulls the spirit.